EAST CAMPUS / MIT GATEWAY Alternative Approaches
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
EAST CAMPUS / MIT GATEWAY Alternative Approaches Prepared by The Design Committee July 19. 2013 EAST CAMPUS / MIT GATEWAY Alternative Approaches This report lays out strategic options for design and program of the MIT East Campus and a new Gateway to the institute in the Kendall Square area. Its purpose is to define principles for the planning and design of this critical area of the campus, in light of the recent up-zoning approval given to MIT by the City of Cambridge, and the intention of the MIT Investment Management Company (MITIMCO) to construct approximately 900,000 sq ft of commercial office and laboratory space on the campus south of Main Street. The report examines alternative approaches to achieving this amount of development that will also result in a high quality campus environment, mesh with the broader public realm of Kendall Square and the Charles River, and serve student and future academic needs. This brief report and design study was prepared by a Design Committee of architecture, urban design, and planning faculty in the School of Architecture and Planning. The Design Committee was appointed by Provost Chris Kaiser and Executive Vice President and Treasurer Israel Ruiz following a recommendation of the faculty Task Force on Commu- nity Engagement in 2030 Planning on Development of MIT- Owned Property in Kendall Square. The Task Force was charged by the provost in 2012 with reviewing the Kendall Square project, and recommending whether to go forward. In the process, the Task Force raised concerns about the conceptual diagram put forth for development of the area, which had been prepared by MITIMCO. The Task Force agreed to “support moving forward with MIT’s submission of Design Committee the rezoning petition provided that … A comprehensive urban design plan for East Campus is conducted and com- Adèle Santos (Chair), J. Meejin Yoon (Coordinator) pleted after the petition is approved but before anything is built in the area covered by the petition. The plan needs to Nader Tehrani, Alexander d’Hooghe, Dennis Frenchman, consider alternatives to the current MITIMCo diagram for commercial building sites, floor plates, program, heights, and Anton Garcia-Abril, Carlo Ratti scale of development ...” guided by a set of design principles articulated by the Task Force. East Campus / MIT Gateway - Alternative Approaches 1 Design Principles The work of the Design Committee is aimed at opening up alternative approaches to the design and program- nent node of activity, equivalent to the function of MIT’s Lobby 7, containing destinations relevant to ming for East Campus and the MIT Gateway. It is also intended to inform the work of a subsequent campus the MIT community and helpful to visitors (e.g. an information office) linked to clearly recognizable planning consultant, which MIT will retain in the fall of 2013 to prepared a formal East Campus / MIT Gateway spaces that support learning and research (e.g. laboratories, studios, classrooms, study and meet- Plan. ing spaces accessible to the public). It should connect MIT directly to Kendall Square with minimal physical barriers or gaps. The gateway should be welcoming to residents and visitors. In examining the situation and preparing alternative approaches, the Design Committee was guided by and fully supports the Design Principles articulated by the Task Force. These are excerpted and included in full q East Campus buildings and spaces must create and convey a campus feeling that below, follow by a list of additional, more detailed guidelines that the Design Committee considers to be serves the needs of the MIT community in ways that attract people to the area across important in moving forward. the broad band of hours that typifies the rhythm of student, faculty, and staff life. This means, for example, providing amenities and services for students, faculty, staff and residents, with Principles defined by the Task Force to guide development of the area include: a minimal corporate presence (on the campus side), and well- defined public space for people to gather, affordable places to eat, bicycle parking, and access, etc. To ensure this, the ground floor “Design Principles, Criteria. ... Kendall Square, with its Red Line MBTA station, clearly has the poten- space on all buildings should be primarily reserved for inviting academic, student life, or retail uses, tial to serve as a new gateway to MIT, similar to the function now served by 77 Mass. Ave. to the west. and not have a “gated,” privatized character. Equally important, much of the property that would be developed for commercial tenants could house MIT uses at some point in the future. Therefore, it is critical that these buildings and the space they cre- q Any commercial space in Kendall Square should serve as an extension of the campus ate on the ground be considered first as a part of the campus designed to support our students, faculty and not the other way around. The businesses invited to locate there should complement and and staff… support the mission of MIT to promote innovation and start-ups and allow maximum access to students and faculty for research, class projects, and other mutual learning opportunities. Kendall q There must be a gateway to MIT worthy of MIT and its aspirations, mission and stan- Square should not just be a commercial or corporate office location that happens to be adjacent dards of design excellence. The gateway should not just be an entrance, but a physically promi- to a university. East Campus / MIT Gateway - Alternative Approaches 2 q The portion of the development intended for commercial use should generate an appro- “Flexibility: Envelope versus Constraints. We have heard from the Cambridge City Manager, priate financial return to warrant investment of MIT endowment funds. However, given the MITIMCo, and others that the up- zoning petition would create an “envelope” that would allow for con- location of this development on campus and the need to support academic and student life, it may siderable flexibility in design and development options going forward… Among the options that should not be reasonable to expect the same level of return as that from commercial property developed be considered are: in sites removed from the campus. Alternatively, it would be appropriate for the Institute to consider investing a portion of the income from the Kendall commercial development into developing the q Less commercial development in the area shown as Site 3 on the MITIMCO plan, providing the campus spaces, facilities and academic environment planned for the area. potential to develop a significant gateway to the campus. q Design of commercial development should proceed only in the context of a compre- q A better defined campus space connecting to Eastgate and Sloan that is more closely associated hensive plan for the future of the East Campus, including its public realm, academic, with Main Street, so there can be sufficient interaction and permeability to support campus activity. student life, transport, and recreational functions, taking into account potential disposi- This space should also facilitate interaction with the rest of the Institute, which is vital to achieving tion of all property between Main Street and the Charles River. It is not sufficient or prudent the goal of a “One MIT” campus culture. to design commercial buildings in the absence of a systematic analysis and clear understanding of how the remainder of the East Campus is intended to evolve. It is important that ample space for q More space for academic development and student life. future academic expansion be reserved in the up- zoning petition. We have not studied this issue in sufficient depth to reach a conclusion about how much space at this point, and, therefore, it is an- q Reallocation of height and massing to the edges rather than heart of the campus area, or a smaller other issue for further review and discussion in the post- up- zoning design phase and plan for East commercial project overall. Campus. q Alternate sites for commercial office and housing development that reduce impact on the campus.” East Campus / MIT Gateway - Alternative Approaches 3 Design and Development Guidelines Based on its analysis of the East Campus and alternative approaches, the Design Committee believes that q River Connection – will be established to enable direct physical and visual access from the gate- the following more specific guidelines should be added to the above to guide the work of the campus plan- way to the Charles River. It is possible to achieve this with minimal effort between 100 Memorial ning and design consultant on the East Campus / MIT Gateway: Drive and Building E-51, which is explored in the alternatives. q Gateway spaces – will have a 21st century character, be humanely scaled, defined on the edges q Sloan School Connection – will be an important part of the spatial network and movement by buildings, planting or other elements, include inside (or covered) as well as outside public space, system on East Campus. It is envisioned as a defined public space, with activities along, that termi- to accommodate for the climate, and connect directly to Main Street and the Kendall T Stop. Digital nates in, and helps to create an appropriate entrance space to the Sloan School campus. media may be incorporated to engage the public with MIT, reveal hidden content, animate, and de- fine the place, providing a sense of MIT and the future. q Phasing – of development will occur over time, anticipated to be approximately 15 years. Phasing should be guided by a vision, but able to accommodate changes in program – such as the need for q Gateway programs – will incorporate activities and uses that engage MIT, students, faculty, re- additional academic space or housing – as MIT’s requirements evolve in the future.